Re: Why am I not gay?

Or, at least, a LB or T. I know why I am not an L, but I am getting confused with all the facts disseminated on this forum.If LGBT's make up a huge part of the population regardless what country we are talking about...then why not me?

I ask because I was never told that we are all designed to be homosexual, but I was not. Is it me? Why am I different than others? Can someone please tell me the truth.

what you were told is wrong. In actuality only about 5% of the human population is homosexual, an the percentage of homosexual men is even lower.That includes people with homosexual feelings who never express them, bisexuals, and transgenders/transsexuals.

what you were told is wrong. In actuality only about 5% of the human population is homosexual, an the percentage of homosexual men is even lower.

That includes people with homosexual feelings who never express them, bisexuals, and transgenders/transsexuals.

If that includes "people with homosexual feelings who never express them"... How do you know?

ETA: I think you missed the point of the post. I don't know if that can be taken as "fact."

@Eileen: Do they get to wear hats?

I'm only a part-time b*tch My time inworld is limited, and precious. IMs detailing your bruised ego are unwelcome.Go to my Forum profile and try a PM instead. I may even respond.~ My Silly Little Blog ~

Re: Why am I not gay?

The more interesting question would be, how many people here on SL can be put in which "category". It would show more clearly if there could be a reason to feel less mainstream, because of not being gay, bisexual or transgender or whatever.

Thinking of all the clubs which are focused on them, I think someone could wonder about that.

Re: Why am I not gay?

The more interesting question would be, how many people here on SL can be put in which "category". It would show more clearly if there could be a reason to feel less mainstream, because of not being gay, bisexual or transgender or whatever.

Thinking of all the clubs which are focused on them, I think someone could wonder about that.

I think the percentage of homosexual people (as all rl social fringe groups) in SL is higher than in RL, precisely because many people in RL with such tendencies suppress them because of whatever reason (family/job/social expectations, physical and mental problems, etc.).I know this is the case in the D/s community, no reason it wouldn't be in the homosexual community as well.

I think that the "humans are designed to be homosexual" was a misinterpretation of things. All animals who are not asexual beings (Humans included) are designed to be heterosexual as per evolution. If a species wishes to exist, then it must procreate. Otherwise, it will die out. However, I would say that some humans are designed to be homosexual, for whatever reason. For some reason, some people are born that way. One,two, and three. Homosexuality does exist within nature, but obviously not everyone is gay.

Regarding the population, I would argue that the numbers aren't exactly fair simply because they're not polling enough people. That, added with the fact that a lot of people are lying. (When you live in a country that discriminates on sexuality, for example with blood donorship, then there's going to be lying.) But, that said, I tend to agree with this.Do I think the number is vastly high? No, but I think it is far more than the estimates that there are 1% of people who are gay. I think that around 10-20% of the population is a fairly reasonable number. Most tend to guess that the number is around 10%, but surveys vary. And that doesn't account for all the people who have not been surveyed, who are in the closet, etc.

However, I do find your post humorous. Whether intentional or not (I'm assuming it is), your post mirrors something a homosexual might ask, about why they aren't straight.

As to my original post in the other thread, that struck a nerve with Pudgy evidently, the focus went to the subjective adjective 'huge' I used (perhaps a bit liberally - pun intended), but thinking on it, I really think my error in that statement was using the word 'percent'. Had I typed ''a huge part' instead, it would have probably come across a little better, making the same point.

The issue with the other post was actually resolved right in the topic I think. It was sort of a flip-flopped sentence the person posted and it later became evident they were talking about the scientific theory that assets that genetics play some part in things.

The other misuse (and abuse) of a word or phrase in that thread is when the OP of this thread came in with a flame post throwing around different variations on the word ignorant, all in bold. I believed it to be not only an attack on me personally but totally out of line and written in a spirit that wouldn't be taken as good natured debate in any arena (short of maybe klingon high counsil or something). And that's why I have that person muted on the forums and on the grid now.